VACCINE INFORMATION

An international vaccination bombshell
by veterinary vaccine researcher reveals taxpayer-funded government agencies do
not insure safety and that vaccinated pets (and people) are subjected to dangerous vaccines which serve the pharmaceutical companies far better than the patients.

VACCINATION - EFFICACY &
SAFETY

The following is from one of the world’s leading authorities on vaccination safety and efficacy.
We thank Elizabeth Hart for this information including excerpts from her
communication with the World Small Animal Veterinary
Association’s Vaccination Guidelines (WSAVA) and for
her relentless crusade with other vaccine researchers.

The new 2010 WSAVA guidelines contain these new key statements
which are extremely important:

“Core vaccines should not be given any more frequently than every three
years after the 12 month booster injection following the puppy/kitten
series, because the duration of immunity (DOI) is many years and may be up
to the lifetime of the pet.” (My emphasis.)

“We should aim to vaccinate every animal with core vaccines, and to
vaccinate each individual less frequently by only giving non-core vaccines
that are necessary for that animal.” (My emphasis.)

These are important new statements, with reference to “lifetime” immunity, and
also noting that non-core vaccines should only be given if necessary. In
Australia, with annual MLV (modified live) vaccination under threat, the vets
are pushing blanket vaccination for non-core vaccines such as bordetella, which
is not appropriate. Pet owners should think about these very carefully before
allowing their pets to be vaccinated with non-core vaccines. There is great
resistance from veterinarians to the new reduced
vaccination protocols here in Australia.

An open letter
to representatives of the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines
Authority and representatives of the Australian and International Veterinary
Profession/ Industry - June 2010

RE: UNNECESSARY, AND POSSIBLY HARMFUL, VACCINATION OF COMPANION ANIMALS AND THE
APVMA’S POSITION STATEMENT ON VACCINATION PROTOCOLS FOR DOGS AND CATS

I see that the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines
Authority has recently uploaded to its website a ‘Community
Question’ entitled “Does my dog or cat need to be vaccinated every year?”

As with the publication of the APVMA’s Position Statement on Vaccination
Protocols for Dogs and Cats in January this year, the APVMA’s past failure to
ensure that manufacturers’ MLV vaccine product revaccination recommendations are
evidence based is at the heart of the continuing problem of unnecessary
vaccination of pets, coupled with the reluctance of many members of the
veterinary profession to keep abreast of and acknowledge the latest science on
duration of immunity and vaccination ‘best practice’.

The APVMA’s answer refers to “the vet’s knowledge of the canine/feline immune
system” in relation to vaccination practice.1
This reference is ironic given that the World Small Animal Veterinary
Association’s Vaccination Guidelines Group has warned that “there
is an urgent requirement for education of practicing veterinarians in this area”.2

As you are aware from my previous correspondence to both the APVMA and AVA,
annual vaccination with MLV core vaccines continues to be promoted in the
media, particularly via local newspapers across Australia.3,
Using the media to create fears about disease is a recognized ploy
to sell pharmaceutical products, and is aptly described as ‘disease mongering’
when there is no scientific basis for a product’s use5
(e.g. repeated MLV core revaccination of already immunized adult dogs.)

Pet owners are not being made aware of a key
statement in the APVMA’s Position Statement on Vaccination Protocols for Dogs
and Cats i.e. that: “…the aim should be to ensure that all susceptible
animals are vaccinated, rather than that already well-immunized animals are
revaccinated.”9(My
emphasis.)

In
its Position Statement, the APVMA has admitted its failure to ensure evidence
based regulation of vaccine products, now acknowledging that it “does not
support the retention of label statements that direct or imply a universal need
for lifelong annual revaccination with core vaccines”11.
Similarly, there is no evidence that lifelong triennial revaccination is
required.

It is
unacceptable that pet owners continue to be misled and coerced into paying for
an intervention which has not been proven to be of benefit, particularly when
the intervention has the potential to cause harm. Swift action must be
taken by the APVMA to remove unproven prescriptive revaccination
recommendations on vaccine product labels, and replace them with
evidence based information on the minimumduration of immunity
demonstrated to be provided by these products.

There
is noscientific evidence that either ‘annual’ or
‘triennial’ revaccination of adult dogs with MLV core vaccines is necessary.
In notes
discussing the 2006 Canine and Feline Vaccination Guidelines,
Richard Ford, Professor of Medicine, North Carolina State University, and a
member of the AAHA Canine Vaccine Task Force,
states:

It’s important to note that the recommendations of the AAHA Canine Vaccine Task
Force for triennial booster administration are based on data derived from
vaccines that were on the market 5 years ago. Independent studies support the
fact that extended durations of immunity (protection) against canine distemper,
parvovirus, and adenovirus-2 are provided by all of the licensed (core) vaccines
that were on the market between 2000 and 2003.

Any implication
that a “3-year vaccine” must be used when adhering to current vaccination
recommendations is wrong…and misrepresents the intent of the 2006 AAHA Canine
Vaccine Guidelines.17

A
recent paper, (published in the Journal of Comparative Pathology in January
2010), coauthored by Ronald Schultz, Professor and Chair of the Department of
Pathobiological Sciences University of Wisconsin-Madison,
and a member of the WSAVA Vaccination Guidelines Group and AAHA Canine Vaccine
Task Force, reiterates what has been well-known within the veterinary industry
for years, i.e.: “In general, adaptive immunity following vaccination with
modified live virus (MLV) vaccines develops earliest and most effectively in
that it is often complete (e.g. sterile immunity is induced) and duration of
immunity (DOI) is often lifelong.”20(My emphasis)

In a recent
paper titled “How I Vaccinate an Animal with Previous History of Adverse
Reaction”, presented at the WSAVA congress in Geneva (June 2010),
Michael Day, Professor of Veterinary Pathology, University of Bristol, and Chair
of the WSAVA Vaccination Guidelines Group,
provides a telling example which is very pertinent to all dogs…

The first consideration is whether this dog requires
revaccination at all. This is an
adult dog that was appropriately immunized as a pup and received DHP boosters at
3 and 6 years with LPi boosters annually. Although the licensed duration of
immunity (DOI) for the core vaccine components (DHP) is three years, there is
now evidence for a minimum DOI of 9 years for CDV and CPV and, in reality, a dog that is appropriately
immunized as a pup probably never requires another core vaccine during its
lifetime. (My emphasis)

The non-core
components of this animal's vaccine schedule (LPi) are also unnecessary.Although
they do not have a DOI greater than 1 year, this is a city dog that is never
kenneled in a boarding establishment and its lifestyle means that its risk of
exposure to Leptospira or the canine respiratory complex is minimal. If the
owner is in any doubt as to whether the animal is protected against the core
vaccine-preventable diseases, then serological testing may be used to allay any
fears. The presence of anytitre of antibody to CDV, CAV and CPV
is indicative of protection.21(My
emphasis.)

Richard
Squires, Associate Professor in Companion Animal Medicine at James Cook
University, and a member of the World
Small Animal Veterinary Association's Scientific Advisory Committee,
acknowledged that the Australian veterinary profession had lagged behind the
rest of the world in accepting that there is no scientific justification for
annual revaccination of pets, and noted “there is strong and mounting
evidence that most vaccinations administered to adult dogs and cats serve no
beneficial 'immunological' purpose whatsoever.”22(My emphasis.)

Pet owners must be properly warned that neither
‘annual’ nor ‘triennial’ revaccination of adult dogs with MLV core
vaccines has been proven to be necessary. ... It is unacceptable that pet
owners continue to be badgered into having unnecessary, and potentially harmful,
repeated MLV core revaccination for their pets.

Vaccines
should not be given needlessly. Core vaccines should not be given any
more frequently than every three years after the 12 month booster
injection following the puppy/kitten series, because the duration of
immunity (DOI) is many years and may be up to the lifetime of the pet.28
(My emphasis.)

We should
aim to vaccinate every animal with core vaccines, and to vaccinate each
individual less frequently by only giving non-core vaccines that are
necessary for that animal.29
(My emphasis.)

On
the topic of vaccine safety, in his letter to The Veterinarian, Peter
Bracken attempts to play down “misconceptions about safety” of vaccine
products.38
Similarly, in its Position Statement on Vaccination Protocols for Dogs and Cats,
the industry-funded APVMA makes assertions about the low incidence of adverse
experiences with dog and cat vaccines, i.e.:

The incidence of adverse experiences associated with dog and cat vaccines
reported to the APVMA’s Adverse Experience Reporting Program (AERP) is low: less
than 1 in 10,000 doses. The incidence of more serious reactions such as
anaphylaxis is very low, and appears to be similar for initial vaccinations and
revaccination, which is also true for human vaccines.39

A low
‘reported’ incidence of adverse experiences is no excuse for prescription of
so-called ‘preventive’ products that have not been proven to be efficacious or
beneficial with repeated application.

The
2010 WSAVA guidelines acknowledge that:

…there is gross under-reporting of adverse events
which impedes knowledge of the ongoing safety of these products.40

and

…we should aim to reduce the ‘vaccine load’ on
individual animals in order to minimize the potential for adverse reactions to
vaccine products.41

Who
really knows how many adverse reactions result from unnecessary vaccination?
Inadequate vaccine safety trials and ineffective post-marketing surveillance
mean that many adverse reactions, including delayed adverse reactions and
long term health problems, are likely to go unacknowledged and
unreported.

The
failure in regulation and post-marketing surveillance means veterinarians who
unnecessarily vaccinate and over-service continue to get away with this
unethical practice, particularly as it has been recognized that ‘some’
veterinarians are reluctant to acknowledge and report adverse reactions.42,
43, 44 The status quo is being protected
from scrutiny.

The
true range of possible adverse reactions is unknown because it appears there was
little pre-licensure safety testing done to test short-term and delayed effects
of vaccination. According to a paper titled “Epidemiological approaches to
safety investigations”, James Wood and Vicki Adams note:

Most safety testing is undertaken prior to granting of a marketing authorization
and is generally on a small scale. Field trials are usually much larger, but
still involve relatively low numbers of animals compared to the number to which
authorized products are administered. Safety testing is generally aimed at
detecting common events; the numbers of animals used in the tests are too small
for detection of all but the most common reactions. The efficiency of the tests
depends on the frequency and severity of the adverse reaction and the ability to
associate the adverse event with the product.

In
other words, dogs in the community are the guinea pigs for these vaccines. They
(and their owners) are unknowingly part of a huge unregulated trial, the results
of which are not being reported…

David
Hustead, International Technical Director of Fort Dodge Animal Health,
admits that the biologic necessity to revaccinate annually has not been
demonstrated.49
Hustead also notes that “the quality and quantity of safety information on an
animal vaccine label is much less than that found on the labels of common human
vaccines”. According to Hustead “it is not unusual for an animal
vaccine label to essentially ignore the safety concerns of vaccine
administration with the exception of anaphylaxis”. Animal vaccine labels
contain only “a few short safety statements, that in all probability do
not accurately reflect the clinical safety of the product as observed by all
users”.50
(My emphasis.)

Due
to limited testing, vaccine labels generally only include details of possible
immediate side effects; they do not include details of possible delayed
adverse reactions to vaccination. In an article
discussing adverse reactions to vaccination, Jean Dodds states “beyond the
immediate hypersensitivity reactions, other acute events tend to occur 24 to 72
hours afterward, or 7 to 45 days later in a delayed type immunological
response”.51
(My emphasis.)

Editor's Note:
Paste a link in your web browser address bar or search for the document by name
in a web search engine. The following vaccine related reference articles may
have been moved.

(1) APVMA’s ‘Community Question –
Does my dog or cat need to be vaccinated every year?’ 7 June 2010:

(3) Open letter to Allen Bryce,
Program Manager, Veterinary Medicines Australian Pesticides and Veterinary
Medicines Authority, 24 January 2010:
http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/Open_letter_to_APVMA_AVA_ASAVA_CCPD_24-01-10.pdf

(4) Open letter to Mark Lawrie,
President of the Australian Veterinary Association, 6 May 2010. Copied to Allen
Bryce and other parties: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/Open_letter_to_the_AVA_re_continuing_unnecessary_vax_May_2010.pdf

(8)
Radford, A. EDITORIAL: The hitchhiker's guide to dog and cat vaccination.
Journal of Small Animal Practice. Volume 51 Issue 6 (June 2010). (p 293-294).
Published Online: Jun 1 2010 1:46PM 9 Australian Pesticides and Veterinary
Medicines Authority’s Position Statement on Vaccination Protocols for Dogs and
Cats. Published 21 January 2010, revised 25 January 2010: http://www.apvma.gov.au/news_media/news/2010/2010-01-21_vaccination_position.php
The statement was revised after my urgent criticism to include the statement:
…the aim should be to ensure that all susceptible animals are vaccinated, rather
than that already well-immunized animals are re-vaccinated. (My emphasis)

(10) Ibid.

(11) Ibid.

(12) Ibid.

(13) Australian Veterinary Association – Vaccination of Dogs and Cats Policy,
ratified by the AVA Board 26 June 2009.

Currently accessible via this link: http://ava.informz.net/ava/data/images/documents/ava-vaccination-policy-final-june09.pdf
and on the AVA’s home page: http://avacms.eseries.hengesystems.com.au//AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&WebsiteKey=bbfd2ab3-e7fc-4456-bc66-

bba966478417

(14) Australian Veterinary Association and Australian Pesticides and Veterinary
Medicines Authority Joint Media Statement on Vaccination of Dogs and Cats, dated
5 February 2010: http://avacms.eseries.hengesystems.com.au/AM/Template.cfm?Section=20104&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&Con

(21) Day, M.J. How I Vaccinate an Animal with Previous History of Adverse
Reaction. 35th World Small Animal Veterinary Association 2010 WSAVA Congress,
Geneva, June 2-5 2010: http://www.vin.com/proceedings/Proceedings.plx?CID=WSAVA2010&Category=&PID=56260&O=Generic

(24) Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority’s Position
Statement on Vaccination Protocols for Dogs and Cats. Published 21 January 2010,
revised 25 January 2010: http://www.apvma.gov.au/news_media/news/2010/2010-01-21_vaccination_position.php

(25) Seavers, A.. Three-year vaccination intervals: a different view from the
parvo trenches of practice-land. The Veterinarian. April 2010, pp 23-27.

(26) Australian Veterinary Association – Vaccination of Dogs and Cats Policy,
ratified by the AVA Board 26 June 2009. Currently accessible via this link:
http://ava.informz.net/ava/data/images/documents/ava-vaccination-policy-final-june09.pdf
and on the AVA’s home page: http://avacms.eseries.hengesystems.com.au//AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&WebsiteKey=bbfd2ab3-e7fc-4456-bc66-

(31) APVMA’s response to the discussion paper “A National Scheme for Assessment
Registration and Control of Use of Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals”.
February 2010: http://www.daffa.gov.au/agriculture-food/food/regulation-safety/agvet-chemicals/domestic-policy/psic/responses-to-discussionpaper/australian_pesticides_and_veterinary_medicines_authority

(34) APVMA’s response to the discussion paper “A National Scheme for Assessment
Registration and Control of Use of Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals”.
February 2010: http://www.daffa.gov.au/agriculture-food/food/regulation-safety/agvet-chemicals/domestic-policy/psic/responses-to-discussionpaper/australian_pesticides_and_veterinary_medicines_authority

(35) CHOICE response to the discussion paper “A National Scheme for Assessment
Registration and Control of Use of Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals”.
February 2010: http://www.daffa.gov.au/agriculture-food/food/regulation-safety/agvet-chemicals/domestic-policy/psic/responses-to-discussion-paper/choice

(36) A vaccine industry newsletter, published in 2005, illustrates this fact,
reporting that 89% of veterinarians surveyed indicated that dog and cat
vaccinations were the number one contributor to practice turnover, and that 91%
of veterinarians felt that a change from annual vaccination would have an
adverse effect on their practice turnover. The newsletter concluded: “Annual
vaccination appears to be an important source of income for many veterinarians”.
Virbac Newsletter “Facts on Vaccination”, August 2005.

(39) Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority’s Position
Statement on Vaccination Protocols for Dogs and Cats. Published 21 January 2010,
revised 25 January 2010: http://www.apvma.gov.au/news_media/news/2010/2010-01-21_vaccination_position.php